I'm not sure this is really a hardware fault, but then again it's not really software either (well it may be, it's probably windows but may be Bios related

Anyway problem is as follows:-

My PC has a Quad core (Kentsfield) Q6600 G0 stepping CPU, stock speed is 2.4Ghz 266ish x 9, but mine runs at 400 x 8 which is 3.2Ghz.

No problem so far and the BIOS splash screen reports this correctly, mobo is a Gigabyte GA P35 DS3P, OS is Vista Ultimate 64bit.

CPUID reports CPU speed correctly but Sandra and Vista insist on speed being 3.6Gig, ie 400 x original 9 multiplier, some parts of Everest report 3.2, and some (eg the same CPU page!) report 3.6.

I know it's not of earth shattering importance and it has no effect on my PC, but it is annoying.

Does anyone have any links to solutions on Gigabyte or MS pages (I've looked but they seem to elude me) or even have their own solution?

Thanks

Take CPU-Z and the BIOS as mostly gospel. Not quite sure why the others are flaking on it.

hi, vista just reports it at that speed because it exects it to be run on a 9 multi, no fix as far as I know.

I know it's running at 3.2 (400 x 8) and CPUID and BIOS are right, I just wondered if anyone else had this problem, and if so if they had a cure.

Bloody windows !

I suppose with Everest it gets aome info from CPUID and some from sysinfo so that accounts for that discrepancy but why oh why can't Vista count

I have slowed my Q6600 to 3GHz as I'm not currently gaming but XP says its 3.37GHz. I normally run at 3.4 for gaming and XP shows it as way more. I go on BIOS and CPUZ tbh.

If you try it on ORTHOS aswell, it'll probably do the same thing.

On mine, ORTHOS gives me the same CPU speed, but different frequencies and multis, it says its an estimated one, presumebly by knowing the default multi and just using that.

I don't think I'd ever trust the OS's guess, the things that Windows can tell you. And now Vista with SP1 is even lieing about the amount of RAM in 32bit systems,

Must admint i got mine running at 3.125 on a XP machine

355 x 9

not had any problems

I wonder if it's a motherboard thing, I changed my MB from a gigabyte to a biostar, now vista doesn't show the correct over-clocked speed but it did with the gigabyte????

As mentioned, it is usually the multi that throws it off. Windows seems to read the FSB x the default multi.

Coretemp does it too; or it used to. I can remember it throwing up some fairly spectacular FSBs.